Isaiah 30:6
“This is God’s message about the animals of the southern desert: âThe ambassadors travel through dangerous country, where lions live and where there are poisonous snakes and flying dragons. They load their donkeys and camels with expensive gifts for a nation that cannot give them any help.”

This is Part 3 of an article that almost literally would never have an end. Part 1 âCrouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaurs-How Evolutionary Science Hides Historical Man and Dinosaur Interaction in Plain Sightâ was written back in December 2011 and Part 2 was written in July, 2012. What happens is that I collect the data over time and eventually sit down and write the article. There is usually quite a bit of procrastination involved. This may be a little confusing; THIS IS PART 3 OF THE “CROUCHING” Series.

Unfortunately due to the number of Photos I’ve had to split Part 3 into 3 Pages. Follow? Part 1 and 2 of the SERIES were long, single paged articles.

The theme of all three of these articles is that 1) the non-coexistence of man and animals that science now calls dinosaurs somehow became an important Darwinian meme. 2) that the potential connection between the dragons of old and dinosaurs of old should be obvious and 3) that the reason it is perhaps not so obvious is that there has been a successful campaign by the scientific paradigm and other interested parties to obscure the truth.

Why? Dinosaurs serve as an Darwinist/Materialist mascot and appear to support the idea that the world is millions of years old. There is of course a great contrast in the timescales derived from the Bible for the earthâs existence (thousands of years) and that of modern science (billions of years). The mysterious, extinct, creatures science calls dinosaurs could make even some devout Christians wonder just how they fit into a young earth and into the Genesis account and they are a cornerstone in the belief system of some who believe that dinosaurs and other evidence provide clear evidence of biblical error and scientific ignorance.

As a consequence the paradigm is supported in the way most paradigms are supported; until they are proved with overwhelming evidence to be erroneous; supporting evidence is embraced and trumpeted, contrary evidence is suppressed, ignored and/or ridiculed. This is not so much an evolution/Darwin mode of behaviorâit is human behavior.

One recent case in point. Scott Wolter is a forensic geologist and host of an alternative history program on H2 called âAmerica Unearthedâ. He is willing to look at out of place artifacts that academia can tell is fake from 100,000 mile away simply because they donât fit the paradigm. I was watching his investigation of the Tucson relics (The Desert Cross Episode) last night; a group of lead artifacts found in Arizona in 1924. This group of swords, picks, shovels and crosses were found embedded in a type of natural cement that they had to be pried out of.

The artifacts contained symbols and Roman numerals indicating that they were from 800A.D. Controversy has swirled around the objects since their discovery and the discoverer was thought by many to be a fraud. The most compelling evidence against their genuineness is an etching of a sauropod dinosaur on one of the pieces. Case closed, right?

After testing the metal, investigating the symbols and Roman letters, examining the crystalline build up which they concluded would take hundreds of years to form etc. âhe concluded that the artifacts were genuine. He then chided academia for ignoring the artifacts which being pre-Columbian would have collided with the paradigm. Oh, and what of the dinosaur which had troubled him greatly?
One line.
Oh, the creature has a forked tongue and Iâve never heard of a dinosaur with a forked tongue-so weâve decided that it is a lizard? Who is it who actually knows anything about dinosaur soft tissue including their tongues? The âlizardâ marked to show the lines more clearly is shown here.

Here are a few other examples where the paradigm did not understand the words that were coming out of the mouth of history.

4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
If youâre a non-Bible believer, one thing that you will have to give the writers of the Bible credit for is going out on a limb about there having been âgiants on the earth in those daysâ.

If the Bible is not inspired of God but is really just a number of uninspired authors who have assembled various myths and stories, where would they get their notions about giants given that according to current science they would never have seen dinosaurs and –giant men were not part of the evolutionary sequence for man?

If you are a believer you have already accepted that the Bibleâs statements concerning giants in those days is true and youâre willing to take that on faith. Paulâs New Testament definition of faith however includes the notion that evidence exists to support faith. Taking these two viewpoints together; the Bible is true-the Bible is false, evidence that giants did exists at one time on the earth (which is consistently resisted by science for obvious reasons) supports the idea of the inspiration of scripture on this topic and on others as well.

MUMMIFIED GIANT INDEX FINGER DISCOVERED BY GRAVE ROBBER IN EGYPT

Today, the average male middle finger is about 4 inches long. The index (pointing) finger is usually about half an inch shorter than the middle finger on the average man of today. So what could be said for an ancient, mummified human index finger 38 cm or just under 15 inches long? If itâs a mummified human finger then the owner must have been upwards of 20 feet tall!

Naturally occurring glass like obsidian was used by many ancient societies around the world but it is thought that the first manmade glass was created by the ancient Mesopotamians or the ancient Egyptians in the mid third miilenium B.C. The oldest uses for manmade glass is thought to have been smaller objects such as beads.

No one knows quite what to make of a 9 ton slab of ancient glass believed to have been made in one gigantic piece 1600 years ago in a cave, in a cemetery in Galileeâbut since science abhors a knowledge vacuum it has clearly stated what it believes to be the particulars related to the slab.

âThere are two truly astounding things about the slab. First its sheer size: remember it measures 6Âœ x 11 feet. That means it weighs about 9 tonsâ18,000 pounds. When discovered, it was the third largest piece of man-made glass in the world and it was made centuries ago…

“When he raises himself up, the mighty are afraid; because of his crashings they are beside themselves.
Though the sword reaches him, it cannot avail; nor does spear, dart, or javelin. He regards iron as straw, and bronze as rotten wood. The arrow cannot make him flee; slingstones become like stubble to him. Darts are regarded as straw; He laughs at the threat of javelins.â Job 41 NKJV

Holding On to the Faith of Darwin Though the Hand of Godâs Dinosaurs Be Upon Thee

Dr. Ernst Mayr was a âleadingâ evolutionary biologist whose work provided a basis for what is known as the âmodern synthesisâ which is an amalgamation of Darwinian evolution theory and genetics. His work also provided the basis for Niles Eldredgeâs and Stephen Jay Gouldâs co theory of âpunctuated equilibriumâ –proposed because those biologists really did believe that âthe extreme rarity of transitional fossils persists as the trade secret of paleontology.â

Following Mayrâs lead they proposed that speciation could take place rapidly in small, isolated groupsâwhere massive evolutionary leaps took place-making transitional fossils difficult to find because they would not exist. In that way they sought to solve a problem that most evolution believing laity donât even know exists.

This same kind of âthought scienceâ wherein motivated materialists scientists create interesting theories to solve or explain away âproblemsâ with Materialist science is performed by; big bang cosmologists with their invisible dark matter and energy and, of course by other physicists who promote string theory (invisible, infinite universes) to explain the amazingly anthropic (man and life friendly) nature of this universe.

But back to Dr. Ernest Mayr; in a debate with Dr. Duane Gish in 1984, Dr. Mayr then a leading voice among evolutionists said the following:

“…creationists have stated that humans and dinosaurs were contemporaries in time…Were this momentous statement true the names of its discoverers would thunder down the corridors of time as individuals who made one of the most outstanding discoveries of the twentieth century.”

No doubt, based on his statement Dr. Mayr, who died in 2005, was extremely certain that there were tens of millions of years standing between man and dinosaurs.

As a leading evolutionist and as one upon whose work much of the modern synthesis and neo Darwinism was built he well understood the havoc that would be wrought on materialist beliefs regarding the descent of species and the evolutionary and geological timelines if it could be proved that man and dinosaurs were contemporaries.

Nevertheless our plan here at s8int.com today is to prove that Mayrâs âthundering down the corridors of timeâ should have begun even if this is now the 21st Century.

Toe-tally

The current evolutionary thinking regarding the manus and pes (hands and feet) of dinosaurs is that the fossils found with five fingers and toes are the most ancient dinosaurs and that through evolutionary change more âmodernâ dinosaurs evolved to have fewer fingers and toes.

This is the same kind of âlogicâ and thought used to assist in forming the well known but fact free horse evolutionary sequence. One might well wonder why fewer fingers and toes would be considered an evolutionary advancement? Is it a case of âI cried because I had no one finger gloves until I met a man with five fingersâ?

Dr. Niles Eldredge, (mentioned above re: punctuated equilibrium) a curator at the American Museum in New York– where by the way the horse evolution series is still being shown said the following:

âThere have been an awful lot of stories, some more imaginative than others, about what the nature of that history [of life] really is. The most famous example, still on exhibit downstairs, is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared perhaps fifty years ago. That has been presented as the literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now I think that is lamentable, particularly when the people who propose those kinds of stories may themselves be aware of the speculative nature of some of that stuff.â âŠâŠHarper’s Magazine, 1985, p60.

The very masculine named Boyce Rensberger, science writer and evolutionist said the following regarding the famous horse series and its accompanying toe-tally ridiculous evolutionary assumptions:

âThe popularly told example of horse evolution, suggesting a gradual sequence of changes from four-toed fox-sized creatures living nearly 50 million years ago to today’s much larger one-toed horse, has long been known to be wrong. Instead of gradual change, fossils of each intermediate species appear fully distinct, persist unchanged, and then become extinct. Transitional forms are unknownâ . Boyce Rensberger: Houston Chronicle, 5 Nov. 1980, sec. 4, p. 15.

Today it is only high school biology textbook writers and the evolution accepting laity who do not know that the evolutionary horse sequence, a supposed âproofâ of the reality of biological evolution is wrong and is not actually supported by the fossil evidence. The same thing will eventually be found to be true of dinosaurs as well.

The dinosaur that we will look at today would have been one of the older dinosaurs according to evolutionary theory making its appearance in pre Columbian art even more of an upset. The other example which will be provided herein today is from a creature said by evolutionists to have lived even before the dinosaurs.

Letâs begin with the thundering down the corridors of time, already.

â265 Million Year Oldâ Therapsid Pre-Dinosaurs Carved Upon the Roof of the 1300 Year Old Kailashnath Temple (Ellora Caves)

Photo: Suresh.G.Isave – Roof of Kailas Temple, Ellora Caves,India

âKailashnath Temple, also Kailash or Kail?sa or Kailasanath Temple, is a famous temple, one of the 34 monasteries and temples known collectively as the Ellora Caves, extending over more than 2 km, that were dug side by side in the wall of a high basalt cliff in the complex located at Ellora, Maharashtra, India.

Of these, the Kailasa (cave 16) is a remarkable example of Dravidian architecture on account of its striking proportion; elaborate workmanship architectural content and sculptural ornamentation of rock-cut architecture. It is designed to recall Mount Kailash, the abode of Lord Shiva. It is a megalith carved out of one single rock. It was built in the 8th century by the Rashtrakuta king Krishna I.â âŠ.Wikipedia

Perhaps it is fitting to first look at an absolute dead, lock three dimensional sculpture of four therapsids atop the roof of the Temple at Kailashnath built around the 8th century A.D. Fitting to look at them first because evolutionists believe that they preceded the dinosaurs. Therapsida are a group of synapsids, which supposedly include mammals and their ancestors in the evolutionary scheme. Therapsid dicynodonts appeared on every continent.

These creatures are said by evolutionists to have appeared prior to the evolution of mammals and dinosaurs. Weâll consider the dinosaur âproofâ as a second case study.

For comparison purposes we are showing the Ellora âlionsâ juxtaposed with Moschops, a specific therapsid (perhaps the most well known) whose fossils have been found primarily in South Africa.

As you can see there is a very close resemblance between the modern depictions of a therapsid and the ancient “lions” on the roof of the temple complex. The skull shape and other morphological characteristics, including the bent elbows, body shape etc. make therapsid a good initial identification.

By the way lions do have five toes/fingers on their front paws but the fifth is technically on the wrist and does not make contact with the ground. They do not really look like lions but they do have manes and there was no other ready identification or so it seems. They certainly were not ever going to be identified as therapsids.

In point of fact we have already looked at these creatures and identified them crypto-zoo-archaeologically as representations of dinocephalians like Moschops. What’s diiferent today is that the hands of these animals–God’s creatures are upon us. That is, we found a photo of them with significant enough resolution for us to be able to look at the morphological characteristics of the ancient artists depictions of their manus and pes (hands and feet).

The graphic/photo leading this section is a comparison of the “Ellora Lions” with a depiction of Moschops (top left).
The photo following right conclusively concurs with the therapsid identification. The hands (front feet) of therapsids such as moschops was quite unusual. They had tree-trunk like legs with five toes dispersed around in a semi-circle–exactly what we can clearly see in the combo photos comparing moschops front feet with that of the Ellora lions. In fact the similarities are uncanny, unmistakable and undeniable! These are not lions-they are therapsids very similar to moschops.

If therapsids were depicted 1300 years ago on the roof of the Ellora Cave complex then we need not give credence to evolutionistâs beliefs regarding when these creatures became extinct, what creatures allegedly evolved from which or even what their geological boundaries presumably were.

If the scientific understanding regarding when these creatures lived is off by 250 million years how can one credit anything else science would have to say concerning therapsids?

If you want to recreate this âproofâ for yourself, I suggest the following: 1) âGoogleâ or âBingâ search for, âMoschopsâ and then look at images. Pull down a few images of Moschops that you find expressive of what the creature may have looked like in the view of modern artists.

2)Pull up those photos in a photo editing program. 3)Google image search :âEllora Caves, roofâ or âKailashnath Temple roofâ until you find several showing the âlionsâ. 4)Download or copy some of those pictures and compare in your photo editing program with Moschops. You should see some very strong similarities between the two sets because the creatures on the roof are in fact therapsidsâsupposedly extinct tens and tens of millions of years ago.

Next, as an additional âproofâ go back to Google and do an image search of Moschops, âfeetâ, or Moschops âmanusâ (hands). With a little persistence you will find a drawing or a photo which shows the tree trunk like front legs with five fingers distributed like rose petals in a semi circle around the legs. The toes of this creature are unusual in their shape and distribution and this pattern will be easy to recognize when seen again.

Go back to Google (or Bing) and find a very high resolution of the lionâs feet from the roof of the Ellora complex. This result will be instantly recognizable and conclusive. These creatures can be seen from virtually every angle in various online photographs. The âlionsâ of the Ellora Caves have all the morphological features of a therapsid dicynodont.

It wouldnât be that easy to lose 250 million years overnight Iâm sure. Darwinists claim that this creature was a mammal-like reptile but given its mammal like external ears and hair perhaps it was a mammal- a fact which in and of itself would destroy the evolution tree.

Photo: Anteosaurus is a therapsid whose fossil’s have been found in India.

Coelacanth aside Darwinists could not possibly be this wrong– you might reason. If after looking at these photos you are still not convinced that the same creature that is represented online as a therapsid dicynodont is the same creature with the same matching manus and pes (hands and feet)and not a bit of doubt was created then you might want to consider the following:

Your belief in the Darwinian system and all its attendant precepts, corollaries, speculations and just so stories may not be evidenced based. Perhaps your belief in this system is âfaithâ based after all and there is no âevidenceâ pro or con which could persuade you that man and dinosaur ever co-existed or that the âextreme rarity of transitional fossils persists as the trade secret of paleontologyâ.

You may be a âtrue believerâ?

700 Year Old Plumbate Vessel Features A Dinosaur with Hands and Feet Clearly Depicted

âRegarding the timing of this vessel, GarduĂ±o said that this is late-characterized by its decorative variant cutaway designs are distinguished by their angular strokes a stiff-pot Iguanas Polychrome type, which is one of the components ceramic diagnostics Ixcuintla cultural phase (1100-1350 AD), Middle Postclassic, which represents the later stage in the long sequence of regional development AztatlĂĄn culture.

This is extremely significant if we consider that the leading specialists in the study of iconic ceramic codex type Mixteca-Puebla style, agree that this appeared in the central highlands of Mexico (Cholula) during the Late Postclassic (1250-1521 AD), and even at a later date to 1300 AD in the Oaxacan Mixtecaâ.. Source:Puerta Norte Acaponeta http://elblogpuertanorte.blogspot.com/2013/05/recupera-el-centro-inah-nayarit.html

Photo: iguanodon with “Hands”

Plumbate ware was manufactured by the ancient Toltecs and is found all around Central America. It was quite frequently orange in color or glossy with incised art.

I have looked at quite a number of pieces of pre Columbian art. Upon initial inspection (FIG 1)I thought that it was perhaps the head of a dinosaur projecting from the vessel but like a number of those pieces that weâve examined on s8int.com, I wondered if it would be convincing to the true believers or rather the true Unbelievers.

Then as I examined the incision I noticed that it appeared to have elbows and a hand with a number of fingers–with a particularly prominent thumb or possibly a thumb claw. Noting the teeth I thought it most probably a meat-eater and so set to work researching dinosaur fingers and toes etc.. Of course I also initially looked at the dinosaurs of Central and South America.

Dinosaurs with five fingers (or so it appears to have) with the teeth of a theropod dinosaur are supposed to be some of the oldest dinosaurs. “Basal theropods”-and of course I believe in no such thing.. and other dinosaurs with five or four fingers (the depiction appears to be five fingers with only the knuckle of one of the fingers showing) include certain theropods, famously, iguanosaurus and plateosaurus. FIG 2 shows a comparison between the hand of plateosaurus, left, the “hand” of the artifact, center and iguanosaurus, right. Baryonx, a European dinosaur with South American “cousins” in the spinosaurid family is shown in the photo at the top of this article due to its prominent thumb claw- similar to that depicted on the plumbate artifact. FIG 2A shows the upturned hand of the artifact compared with the upturned hand of iguanosaurus with his well known thumb claw.

âThe most primitive dinosaurs in the famous theropod group (that later included Tyrannosaurus rex) had five “fingers.” Later theropods had three…â Live Science

After quite a bit of research I was able to find an additional photograph of this artifact and thus was able to see in some detail the artistâs rendering of both the hands and feet of the animal depicted. These fingers and toes make it a certainty that it is a dinosaur that is being depicted by the artist and even provides clues as to the specific species of dinosaur that the artist was able to interact with.

The complete thoroughness of the artistâs rendition of this dinosaur indicates that he/she was familiar with this creature and that he/she had specific morphological knowledge of how the creature moved and how it looked. The dinosaur being depicted is apparently bi-pedal and the artistâs sculpture of how that creature moved is exactly how modern artists might have depicted a bi-pedal dinosaur.

The new photo shows the creature from the other side. What’s clear is that what we are looking at on the other side is a five, possibly four fingered dinosaur hand. The two sides are not identical and the new photo provides details of the elbow, the hand, and the rear feet (See FIG 6). It appears from this side that the hand is represented as three extended fingers and two knuckles.

I believe that the creature’s reptilian head and aspect along with its meat eating dinosaur teeth if I may– comfortably place it in the dinosaur realm for those with open minds.

Spend a few minutes Googling iguana hands or lizard hands as well as the hands of dinosaurs and the conclusion will be all but inescapable. In the end I’ve moved away from the iguanodon identification because of the teeth of this dinosaur. The teeth are of different sizes with very large teeth at the front. A dinosaur that meets the qualifications of being a meat eater, with five fingers and heterodontal (different sized) (See FIG 7) teeth with relatives found in South America is the heterodontosaurus.

Heterodontosauridae (“different-toothed lizards”) is a family of early ornithischian dinosaurs that were likely among the most basal (primitive) members of the group. Although their fossils are rare, they lived around the globe beginning in the late Triassic Period, and a few late-surviving species persisted into the Early Cretaceous.

Heterodontosaurids were fox-sized dinosaurs less than 2 meters (6.6 ft) in length, including a long tail. They are known mainly for their characteristic teeth, including enlarged canine-like tusks and cheek teeth adapted for chewing, analogous to those of Cretaceous hadrosaurids. Their diet was herbivorous or possibly omnivorous.

Manidens is a genus of heterodontosaurid dinosaur from the Middle Jurassic of Patagonia. Fossils have been found from the CaĂ±adon Asfalto Formation in Chubut Province, Argentina, dating to the Bajocian…Wikipedia

In the next few slides we compare the ancient, pre Columbian artifact with Ceratosaurus and Herrerasaurus. Ceratosaurus because it is a “basal” theropod with an interesting fingers that also had some interesting “head” features such as a snout horn and other protuberances on its head which might incline one to consider it as the animal being depicted. However, assuming that the artist had an actual creature in mind, the teeth did not appear to match.

On the whole though I believe that the ceratosaurus depiction assists us in seeing how close the ancient depiction is to that of modern dinosaur depictions.

The other depiction is of Herrerasaurus. Herrerasaurus had claws similar to those of the plateosaurus above (FIG 2).

Herrerasaurus was given the name âHerrera lizardâ because it was found by an Andean goat farmer named Victorino Herrera…Wikipedia.

Photo: Artifact compared to Heterodontosaurus.

The ancient artifact from central highlands of Mexico (Cholula) was likely manufactured 600 t0 700 years ago during the Late Postclassic period between (1250-1521 AD. The artist clearly represented the hands, fingers, head, dentition and rear feet of a bi-pedal dinosaur which had to be living at the time. It was a dinosaur (animal) that he was very familiar with. We can match the fingers and toes with several species of dinosaur though we will admit that a final identification as to species is inconclusive. A dinosaur identification is however; conclusive.

In his review of Carl Sagan’s last book in his review entitled “Billions and Billions of Demons”, Harvard university evolutionist Richard Lewontin said the following.

“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. ”

I love that quote because it is so honest. Never mind the scientific process we take these positions because we refuse A priori to believe in God or in anything which would tend to prove that God exists. Unfortunately for Lewontin et. al., they have not succeeded. The “Divine foot” has always been completely through the door.

The evidence demonstrated by these two artifacts shows that never mind the Divine Foot, Lewontin et. al.,- the hand of God’s dinosaur is upon thee as is the whole creation.

In the movie; âThe Princess Brideâ an important character, Inigo has a conversation with the man in black during a sword fight and that conversation has become a trope in television and movies (convention or device used in creative works). The conversation goes something like this:

Inigo: âI admit it: you are better than I am!â
Man in Black: âThen why are you smiling?â
Inigo: âBecause I know something you don’t know.â
Man in Black: âAnd what is that?â
Inigo: âI AM NOT LEFT HANDEDâ [Switches the sword to his right hand and starts driving him back]

I sometimes have the feeling that I am in Inigoâs position when I find myself in a conversation with someone about man and dinosaurs living at the same time.

âYou believe that man and dinosaurs lived together at the same time within the last 10,000 years theyâll say incredulouslyâ? Or perhaps theyâll say it sneeringly, or contemptuously or in some rare cases even sadly or compassionately.

They are quite certain that they have the upper hand, the science, the good sense, the pure knowledge the unmitigated certainty. They slap their foreheads. They roll their eyes. All that. They believe that they are winning this âfightâ-discussion-debate because-come on! They may even be fellow believers.

Theyâre thinking that I have set science aside for some kind of blind faith belief in what science has said is impossible-for the sake of the Bible. Theyâre thinking Iâm living in some anti-science anti-evidence bubble. However, as a Christian I have choices. I could believe as some Christianâs do that God created through evolution and that man and dinosaur did miss each other by millions of years.

I could believe that the dinosaurs were wiped out in the flood and thus man and dinosaur barely met. I could believe as some Christians do that God sent unbelievers a strong delusion because of their unbelief (Romans 1) and simply put the bones of animals that never existed in the ground in order to further delude them.

I could simply choose not to speak when this topic is raised thinking that as a Christian it is outside of my pay grade, that the answers are unknowable. I could choose to be cowed by the sheer numbers of people who unblinkingly accept the current paradigm.

Caption: The Real Postosuchus? See BelowBut I know something they don’t know. I took a fact based approach. I went where the evidence took me and in this internet age the truth can be found. Many non-Christians donât know that faith is supposed to be built- not on nothing as they assumeâbut on evidence. âNow faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.â Heb 1:1

I have spent a lot of time sifting through the evidence in ancient history, the work of ancient âbiologistsâ the articles in old newspapers and recently the evidence in world famous archaeological museums. The evidence is clear. The evidence is persuasive.

The evidence proves that dinosaurs and man lived together all over the world in the last few thousand years. Now, the Bible is a âtypeâ of sword and in this dinosaur and man conversation weâre having they are the ones who donât have the facts or the truth. There is a reason why I am smiling:– I AM NOT LEFT HANDED!

Peabody Museum Zoomorphic Stone Heads Historians say that dragons appear in the history and art of virtually every ancient culture (as do stories of a great flood). Hereâs an interesting fact along those lines; no matter what culture a piece of ancient art comes from everyone can instantly recognize a dragon. Isnât that interesting? Here we have a supposedly completely mythological creature, a product of the imagination of man and culture and yet they agree across geography and time in the salient characteristics of their portrayals with the added peculiarity that everyone knows that they are dragons?

No modern artist who works for a science journal or a museum or is otherwise engaged in depicting dinosaurs from a few bones is going to draw a dragon-like creature. So, although dragons are reptilian, frightening sometimes preternaturally large creaturesâand so are dinosaurs they donât often look much alike when you get down to the details. But hereâs the rub when it comes to that; no one living actually knows what dinosaurs looked like.

In prior articles on this topic weâve often quoted Discover Magazine on this point;

Thereâs a running joke among professional dinosaur artists that goes like this: Given just an elephant skeleton, theyâd probably render a titanic hamster. Does anyone know what dinosaurs really looked like? Sure we do. We see them everywhere, not just in the museums, but in magazines, movies, even in value meals at McDonaldâs. But all of these lifelike renderings are mostly artistic interpretations based on very sparse scientific evidence. Discover Magazine, What Did Dinosaurs Really Look Like? By William Speed Weed, Christopher Griffith|Friday, September 01, 2000

http://discovermagazine.com/2000/sep/featdino

Of course, Discover Magazine isnât the only source that admits that science is just guessing when it puts forth a drawing or illustration of a dinosaurâparticularly when many dinosaurs are only known from a few bones.

A new book entitled âAll Yesterdays: Unique and Speculative Views of Dinosaurs and Other Prehistoric Animalsâ by paleo artists C.M Koseman and John Conway is a review of dinosaur depictions and misconceptions in science art and a speculation about potential alternate depictions. They are basically letting the reader in on their secret that the work they do is simply informed speculation.

In the photo on the right they freely speculate on how a dinosaur paleontologist might have interpreted the bones (absent muscle and soft parts) of the cow and the housecat (bottom).

This interpretation problem makes it tougher on “crypto-zoo-archaeologists” like me. My hypothesis that man and dinosaur lived during the same age and that the ancient peoples would have left evidence in the form of their art, history and artifacts is complicated by the fact that the work of paleo artists today might not match up with the work of the actual eyewitnesses living in the past.

Thus, for instance a dinosaur in an archaeological museum like Harvardâs Peabody Museum might be perfectly depicted by the ancient artist but not match up with current thinking on how that dinosaur looked and go unrecognized; categorized as zoomorphic, unknown, animal, mythological creature or simply reptile. (Actually my experience is that any depiction recognizable as a dinosaur or one which is deemed too close does not end up in the front room of the museum in any case).

For example, in eyewitness viewings of what I believe are living pterosaurs over the last few years some have described the creature the saw as âalmost prehistoric lookingâ, which could mean that they saw a living creature that did not completely comport with modern illustrations of the creature.

Moche Culture Vase in the Form of…?
In the last few weeks I set out to prove my hypothesis at the Harvard Peabody, online archaeological museum site as well as at other online collection sites. The Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University âis steward to one of the oldest and largest collections of cultural objects in the Western Hemisphereâ. Other online collections visited include, the Penn Museum, the Met and several Museums of Central and South America.

Could it be shown that creatures that are recognizable as dinosaurs and Not dragons-in the mythological sense are somehow going unnoticed in their online collections? Can we show how specific types of dinosaurs might have been erroneously depicted? In that case, the depiction would have to be close enough for an identification to be made.

In this article and shall we say âcollectionâ I intend to show once again through the arts of ancient peoples that man and dinosaur lived together within the last 5,000 yearsâbut only to the fair and open minded.

The Eyewitness to Recent, Ancient History Dinosaur Collection, Part 1

1)Chasmosaurus at the Museo Larco, Peru

Actually it is not a piece from the Peabody that I wish to start with. It is a piece from the Museo Larco that illustrates the points we have been making about identification and misidentification most clearly. (See complete vessel at top of this article).

The Larco Museum (Spanish: Museo ArqueolĂłgico Rafael Larco Herrera) is a privately owned museum of pre-Columbian art, located in the Pueblo Libre District of Lima, Peru. The museum is housed in an 18th-century vice-royal building built over a 7th-century pre-Columbian pyramid.

The Inca civilization spanned the period of 1438 to 1533 in pre-Columbian South America. That would make this piece between 500 to 600 years old.

Inca Pot Water Carrier Lima
Museo Larco, Peru

I believe that the animal atop this Inca water carrier (and atop this article) is a ceratopsian dinosaur of a type similar to Chasmosaurus particularly given the placement of its horn and the shape of its frill. Ceratopsians might have broken down neatly into the categories now suggested by science or they could have been as widely divergent as dogs are today. They may have been sexually dimorphic and animals identified as belonging to another species may have only been sexually dimorphic or juvenile versions of other science-identified species.

âChasmosaurus (/?kĂŠzm??s?r?s/ KAZ-mo-SAWR-?s) is a genus of ceratopsid dinosaur from the Upper Cretaceous Period of North America. Its name means ‘opening lizard’, referring to the large openings (fenestrae) in its frill (Greek chasma meaning ‘opening’ or ‘hollow’ or ‘gulf’ and sauros meaning ‘lizard’). With a length of 4â5 metres (13â16 ft) and a weight of 2 tonnes (2.2 short tons), Chasmosaurus was a ceratopsian of average size. Like all ceratopsians, it was purely herbivorous. It was initially to be called Protorosaurus, but this name had been previously published for another animal.

All specimens of Chasmosaurus were collected from the Dinosaur Park Formation of the Dinosaur Provincial Park of Alberta, Canada. C. russelli comes from the lower beds of the formation while C. belli comes from middle and upper beds. ââŠWikipedia

Let me explain what I believe that youâre looking at. It is a ceratopsian dinosaur similar to the Chasmosaurus. It is 500 years old. The right horn has broken off and is probably what is seen on the animal’s right side from the readerâs perspective.

The heavy ceratopsian tail curls up at the back and the animal fits in terms of body shape and tail for a ceratopsian. The animal has a crest and you should be able to see that the complete head, ending behind the horns includes a solid neck frill ending in a âVâ shape similar to that of the chasmosaurus. In the photo on the left I have thoughtfully replaced the animals missing horn. The artist took pains to make sure that the ceratopsian toes were outlined for the viewer as well.

I believe what we have here is a depiction of a ceratopsian dinosaur that differs slightly from what one expects given modern depictions. The beak is slightly less pronounced-but evident. The horns are actually in the exact place on its head as the horns on modern Chasmosaurus depictions. The creature has growths (possibly pre-horn?) growths on the front of its face that are not seen on ceratopsian depictions.

This is clearly a depiction of a ceratopsian dinosaur by an actual eyewitness some 500 years ago in pre Columbian South America. It should be noted that all the ceratopsia were supposed to have gone extinct 65 million years ago.

2)Peabody Museum â6,000 to 7,000 Year Oldâ Ceramic Bottle with Bi-Pedal Dinosaur (Iguanodon?) from South America

This appears to me quite clearly to represent some type of bi-pedal theropod dinosaur. Here we show the artifact on its side so that the identification of this dinosaur is more easily made. The trio below is shown with two versions of the dinosaur iguanodon, a bi-pedal dinosaur which has been found in North America.

Distinctive features of iguanodon include large thumb spikes, which were possibly used for defence against predators, combined with long prehensile fifth fingers able to forage for foodâŠWikipedia.

Unfortunately that part of the sculpture has been worn away-like noses in Egyptian artifacts. Part of the tail has apparently broken off as well. I believe that this piece represents a bi pedal theropod dinosaur like iguanodon or a relative.

3)Postosuchus Sculpted by Pre Columbians From the Period AD 500-1350 at The Walters Art Museum?
The creature displayed at the top of the pre Columbian incense burner could be called a dragon, a crocodilian (the museum I.D.) or a mythical creature–but no one who believes that dinosaurs and their alleged ancestors died out more than 65 million years ago would ever think of this as a recently extinct, living creature.

Taking that point of view it is easy to ignore the reptilian/dinosaur like armor, the teeth which no lizard ever sported and the distinct horns. In looking at the creature carefully with the assumption that a living creature was being depicted a tentative crypto-zoo-archaeological identification is that of an archosaur like postosuchus.

Postosuchus, meaning “crocodile from Post”, is an extinct genus of rauisuchian reptiles…Postosuchus is a member of the clade Pseudosuchia, the lineage of archosaurs that includes modern crocodilians (the other main group of archosaurs is Avemetatarsalia, the lineage that includes non-avian dinosaurs and their descendants, birds). Its name refers to Post Quarry, a place in Texas where many fossils of the type species, P. kirkpatricki, were found…

Although the heavy build of the skeleton suggests that Postosuchus walked on all four limbs, the extreme shortness of the forelimbs relative to the hind limbs is a strong indication that Postosuchus was able to walk on two legs…Postosuchus possessed heterodonty dentition, which means each tooth was different in size and shape from the others.

A feature of the skull of postosuchus is a “crest” over each eye. Modern artists have had to decide how to draw or illustrate that skull feature and most have not significantly featured them. This piece from the Walters Art Museum has “eye crests” like those of postosuchus which are more clearly featured as crests above each eye.

In other pieces we’ve noted the three toes of a depiction which were similar to dinosaur toes. Postosuchus actually had a different manus and pes than did the dinosaurs. In the minds of scientists postosuchus and its relatives actually preceded the dinosaurs. Of course, most creationists believe that they lived at the same time.

The Museum Description: This incense burner is topped with the portrayal of a caiman or other member of the Crocodylidae family, one of the frequent animal spirit forms of Central American shamans. Its particularly aggressive stance may refer to the practitioner’s battle against supernatural forces.

Many such incense burners were found ritually broken on the slopes of a principal volcano on the island of Ometepe in Lake Nicaragua, the incense burner lid with its smoke issuing from the top mimicking an active volcano.

Among peoples from southern Nicaragua to Mesoamerica the earth was likened to the back of a crocodile floating in the primordial sea, its dorsal scutes being the volcanic north-south backbone that defines the continents of the Western Hemisphere. This incense burner, then, constitutes a profound ritual vessel pertaining to the transition from the natural to the supernatural realms and a symbolic model of the ancient Costa Rican world.

Uh, huh. That’s pretty complicated. Maybe it’s just a depiction of some exceptional local fauna of the time; an or perhaps a small dinosaur of unknown type. Certainly if this same depiction appeared on a site featuring artists renditions of dinosaurs this piece would not be out of place.

The photos above show comparisons of the ancient art work with modern depictions of postosuchus (without the strong “crests” and body armor and in comparison to the skull and the full skeleton of postosuchus. The comparisons appear to me to show a similarity of this depiction with that of one of the archosaurs–such as postosuchus. The feet are not those of a dinosaurs (many are three toed) but the feet of the animal depicted do correspond to that of our identification.

4)Nayarit Chinesco âEmbryonic Dogâ May Be Baby Sauropod

Nayarit is a state in western Mexico. The Nayarit culture from which this artifact comes is from the period 300 B.C. to 400 A.D.âor even older. This piece is said to represent an embryonic dog. Another identification would seem to be in order for this piece.

For one thing, dogs do not have necks this long. Here Iâve shown it in comparison to an animal that really did have such a long neck; the sauropod dinosaur.

Recently a sauropod embryo was found and the sauropod embryo depicted comes from the “Tiniest Giants: Discovering Dinosaur Eggs”.

Sauropods are supposed to have gone extinct 65 million years ago.

5)Ancient Pueblo Culture (1200 B.C.-1500 A.D.) Native Americans of What is Now Arizona Craft Dinosaur Named Aetosaur; Most of Whose Fossils Have Been Found in Arizona

Aetosaur Skeleton Top and Ancient Pueblo Artifact below.

âThe Pueblo people are Native American people in the Southwestern United States comprising several different language groups and two major cultural divisions, one organized by matrilineal kinship systems and the other having a patrilineal system.

These determine the clan membership of children, and lines of inheritance and descent. Their traditional economy is based on agriculture and trade. At the time of Spanish encounter in the 16th century, they were living in villages that the Spanish called pueblos, meaning “towns”ââŠWikipedia

This piece comes from a 1936 expedition to the Hopi reservation and was determined to be from one of the Pueblo Native American cultures. It is described by the Peabody Museum as âzoomorphicâ. Looking at a list of dinosaur fossils found in Arizona one can quickly see that there is a similarity between the archaeological piece and âthe aetosaur. (Angle of aetosaur skeleton head adjusted for comparison purposes.)

âAetosaurs order name Aetosauria from Greek, ????? (aetos, “eagle”) and ?????? (sauros, “lizard”)) are an extinct order of heavily armoured, medium- to large-sized Late Triassic herbivorous archosaurs. They have small heads, upturned snouts, erect limbs, and a body covered by plate-like scutes. All aetosaurs belong to the family Stagonolepididae.

Most fossils have been found from Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas…Wikipedia

.

Here is a sobering fact for those of us who can accept the fact that the ancient Pueblo people of Arizona actually saw and depicted an aetosaur which supposedly lived from 200 million years ago becoming extinct 65 million years or more ago;

âSince their armoured plates are often preserved and are abundant in certain localities, aetosaurs serve as important Late Triassic tetrapod index fossils. Many aetosaurs had wide geographic ranges, but their stratigraphic ranges were relatively short. Therefore, the presence of particular aetosaurs can accurately date a site that they are found in.â

You see the problem? Aetosaurs were roaming around the North American continent during the span of the Pueblo peoples; 1200 B.C. to 1500 A.D. and one of their artists memorialized the aetosaur in ceramic.

6) Crested Hadrosaur Depiction by the Ancient Peoples of Costa Rica at the Peabody Museum. (Modern Artists May Need to Put Some Weight on the Bones of these Depictions)

Crested Dinosaurs are fairly easy to recognize. Most of the crested dinosaurs are from the Lambeosaurinae of the hadrosaur group. The hadrosaurs were also known as the duck billed dinosaurs.

This depiction forms the legs of an ancient pottery piece. The pot is from Costa Rica, Central America. The crests on the various types of lambosaurines differed in size and shape even among the same species and they likely differed due to age and due to sexual dimorphism.

The hadrosaurs depicted have relatively small, round crests. Here we compare them to a number of known lambeosaurines including corythsaurus.

It is interesting that the depictions are clearly of the same animal but that the portraits differ. The ancient depictions are similar to modern ones except for the apparent weight of the creatures and the size of the eyes depicted.

âArchaeologists now know that civilization existed in Costa Rica for thousands of years before the arrival of Columbus, and evidence of human occupation in the region dates back 10,000 years. Among the cultural mysteries left behind by the area’s pre-Columbian inhabitants are thousands of perfectly spherical granite bolas that have been found near the west coast.

The sizes of these inimitable relics range from that of a baseball to that of a Volkswagen bus. Ruins of a large, ancient city complete with aqueducts were recently found east of San Jose, and some marvelously sophisticated gold and jade work was being wrought in the southwest as far back as 1,000 years ago. Some archeological sites in the central highlands and Nicoya peninsula have shown evidence of influence from the Mexican Olmec and Nahuatl civilizations.

By the time Columbus arrived, there were four major indigenous tribes living in Costa Rica. The east coast was the realm of the Caribs, while the Borucas, Chibchas, and Diquis resided in the southwest. â..geographia.com

7)A New Look at Dicynodont Therapsids Like Moschop from the Ancient Peoples Living I Peru, South America

The identity of this animal portrait was unknown apparently and thus it was given the general description âanimal effigyâ by the Harvard Peabody Museum. Was this animal purely a mythological one seen only in the imaginary eye of the artistâor was it seen with the artistâs actual eyes?

As you will see the depiction of the living therapsid is actually close enough to modern depictions of these types of creatures as to be readily identified. In appearance it is close to that of therapsids such as moschops which we know from fossils found in South Africa.

âMoschops (Greek for “calf face”) is an extinct genus of therapsid that lived in the Guadalupian epoch, around 268-260 million years ago. Therapsids are synapsids which were at one time the dominant land animals. It was around 2.7 metres (8 ft 10 in) long..

âŠ.Moschops was heavily built, and had short, chisel-like teeth for cropping vegetation. Moschops mostly ate plants, but sometimes ate meat. The forelegs sprawled outwards, like those of a modern lizard, but the hind legs were under the body, like those of a mammal.â Wikipedia

Here we show the ancient, ceramic artifact in comparison to moschop and to another dicynodont therapsid. Moschops and therapsids similar to him supposedly went extinct before the dinosaurs even evolved. Clearly of this ancient Peruvian artifact represents one of these creatures something is extremely wrong with the evolutionary time scale.

8) Quapawâs âUnderwater Pantherâ from the 1500âs Could In Fact Be an Eyewitness Depiction of Dinosaur Such As Tenontosaurus

According to Wikipedia the Mississippian culture was a mound building group of indigenous people who lived in the Midwestern, Eastern, and Southeastern United States from approximately 800 A.D. to 1500 A.D. The collectors at Artsmia.org believe it to be a depiction of a mythological creature called an underwater panther. That makes these people seem âmysticalâ all right.

But what if it is an accurate depiction of an animal living at the time that we would call a dinosaur-rendered somewhat invisible as a depiction because modern versions of the creature differ greatly? Here is the museum description:

âThe prominent colored swirls and eye motifs mark this animal as an Underwater Panther, one of the primary beings in the ancient Mississippian belief system and that of their descendants. The swirling pattern on its sides signifies water, while the eye markings allude to the animal’s unusually keen vision.

Red and white were symbolically significant colors that represented fundamental oppositions such as peace and war, light and dark and the on-going struggle between the celestial and subterranean realms. Underwater Panthers belonged to the subterranean and possessed great supernatural power. Their significance led Mississippian and subsequent artists to depict them frequently in many forms and media, including three-dimensional sculptures like this vessel. â

The toes of this creature appear to be triple toed-similar to a dinosaur. Its tail is very thick in the way dinosaur tails are often illustrated by modern paleo artists. I took a look to see what types of dinosaur fossils were prominent with respect to quadruped dinosaurs in those parts of the United States.

Here we show the âunderwater pantherâ in comparison to tenontosaurus a genus of medium to large ornnithopod dinosaurs. It should be noted that there were a number of ornnithopod dinosaurs found to have lived in those parts of north America which would have had similar body shapes.

The genus tenontosaurus is known from the late Aptian to Albian ages of the middle Cretaceous period sediments of western North America, dating between 115 to 108 million years ago. It was formerly thought to be a ‘hypsilophodont’, but since Hypsilophodontia is no longer considered a clade, it is now considered to be a very primitive iguanodont.

The teeth of this portrait do give me pause. The point is however not that we know the specific type of dinosaur that was sculpted, but rather that it is more likely that it is a dinosaur being depicted here rather than an underwater panther (which itself sounds like a cryptid).

This artifact is from the Metropolitan Museum of Asian art and is labeled âzoomorphicâ. Iâm somewhat surprised that they didnât call it a camel. Clearly however it is a sculpted ceramic in the form of a sauropod dinosaur.

Sauropod dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago according to science. This piece was estimated to have been made between 250 B.C. and 225 A.ZD. That period obviously covers the time of Christ.

10) Ulisse Aldrovandiâs Detailed Drawing of A Long Tailed Pterosaur; Before They Were âDiscoveredâ By Science

Ulisse Aldrovandi (also Aldrovandus) was born in 1522 and died in 1605. He is sometimes referred to as the father of natural history studies. By profession he was a professor of philosophy but eventually became one of the first professors of the natural sciences at Bologna (no offense intended).

Ulisse died 250 years before the first pterosaur was discovered by a scientist and he mistakenly thought it was a sea going creature. It was not until the beginning of the 19th century that science realized that pterosaurs were flying creatures.

âThe first pterosaur fossil was described by the Italian naturalist Cosimo Collini in 1784. Collini misinterpreted his specimen as a seagoing creature that used its long front limbs as paddles.

A few scientists continued to support the aquatic interpretation even until 1830, when the German zoologist Johann Georg Wagler suggested that Pterodactylus used its wings as flippers. Georges Cuvier first suggested that pterosaurs were flying creatures in 1801, and coined the name “Ptero-dactyle” in 1809 for the specimen recovered in Germany.â âŠWikipedia

After his death his book Serpentum, et draconum historiĂŠ Serpentum, et Draconum was published. In it, was a drawing supposedly from life (well it was dead!) of a dragon which comports very well with a long tailed, crested pterosaur especially given that Aldrovandi was a philosopher and naturalist âand not an artist.

The interesting thing about Aldrovandiâs pterosaur is that it has the crest of the pteranodon and the tail of one of the long tailed rhamphorhynchoid pterosaurs. Although we donât know this exact pterosaur from science it closely matches modern day eyewitness descriptions and drawings of a long tailed pterosaur. (There are long tail crested pterosaurs known to science but none with the classic bone sticking out the back of its head kind).

Note what might look like another set of small wings at the legs of Aldrovandiâs dragon. It is shown here in the more modern drawing between the pteranodonâs legs. That is called the uropatagium; and since it does not appear on birds it is one indication that Aldrovandi actually saw what he drew.

âsome pterosaur groups had a membrane that stretched between the legs, possibly connecting to or incorporating the tail, called the uropatagium; the extent of this membrane isn’t certain, as studies on Sordes seem to suggest that it simply connected the legs but did not involve the tail (rendering it a cruropatagium). It is generally agreed though that non-pterodactyloid pterosaurs had a broader uro/cruropatagium, with pterodactyloids only having membranes running along the legs; Pteranodon in particular might have developed/redeveloped an uropatagium, given the structure of the tailâ..Wikipedia

The picture on the right (above) shows Aldrovandiâs dragon compared to Eskin Kuhnâs drawing (bottom, right) from his eyewitness sighting in the 1970âs. Kuhn was an artist and a soldier stationed at Guantanmo Bay, Cuba. His âpteranodonâ had both the backwards facing âcrestâ and the long tail with tail vain of the rhamphorhynchoid pterosaurs. Top right is a modern drawing of a pteranodon without the long tail. Aldrovandi has the tail, crest and bat like wings of a pterosaur.

11) Peabody Museum Seeks to Make an Ancient Veraguas Culture Dinosaur Evolve Into a Bird Right Before Our Eyes

The âBirdâ effigy ceramic whistle (middle) is from the ancient Veraguas Culture of Panama. That culture inhabited Panama from approximately 700 A.D. to 1530 A.D.

âThis culture inhabited the central region of what is now province of VeraguĂĄs in Panama. The area extends from the Pacific to the Caribbean coast and includes a number of islands. The climate here is mainly humid and tropical, and the landscape includes wooded areas and valleys suitable for agriculture, as well as high mountains, hilly areas, and coastal lowlands.â Museo Chileno de Arte Precolombino

The ceramic sculpture with three legs does not have the correct number for either the bird (two) or the crested hadrosaur (four). My take is that given the teeth (which birds do not have) and the thick tail this is not a depiction of a bird but rather of a crested hadrosaur such as corythosaurus.

The single combined front legs represent the two front legs of the creature and this is not uncommon with pre Columbian art. One can certainly decide for his or her self.

Here are a number of ancient artifacts that do beg the question; sea monster or dinosaur. It may not be clear what animal the artist has in mind but I believe that they so clearly mirror what modern day artists see as dinosaurs and marine reptiles that they simply cannot be imaginary creatures.

The ancient artist in each case intended to represent an actual living creature and they must have expected the beholder to recognize what the creature was as well. In each of these examples only a portion of the animal is sculpted making the crypto detective work more difficult.

In situations like these the museum or the auction house usually leaves this kind of speculation to the viewer but often uses the term âzoomorphicâ as the description. Often as well they will name a creature for which if it were truly what the ancient artist intended he/she would have proven to be a terrible artist. That should drive down prices!

Christieâs auction house described this artifact as a horse which may seem reasonable at first but no horse would have that long a neck. Alternative identifications include the plesiosaur or a dinosaur. Plesiosaurs of course supposedly went extinct around 65 million years ago as did it is claimed, the dinosaur.

The artifact is thought to have come from the period of up to 1,000 Years before Christ.

One in the form of a seated camel, black glazed, carrying two jars on either side of its back; another in the form of a horse, a strap handle joining the rim to the back of the vessel, a perforation at the top of the head forming the spout, 16 cm. high max.; an Amlash terracotta steatopygous idol, possibly 2nd Millenium B.C., 20.5 cm. high, mounted (repaired); and a bull rhyton, not ancient, 15 cm. high (4)

This item is described as a âserpentâ effigy bowl; perhaps a âsea serpentâ?

This pottery piece has been categorized as Neeleyâs Ferry which are artifacts of one of the ancient group of State of Arkansas cultures. Ancient peoples are thought to have lived in Arkansas between 600 B.C. and 1600 A.D.

The Peabody specifically dated the artifact between 1350 and 1550.

This piece is further described as an earthen bowl, animal. The animal has a head with teeth giving the appearance of either a sea creature with long winding tail or perhaps a dinosaur.

Above shows our “sea monster” at another angle which provides additional detail concerning the shape of the head and tail. By the way, seals have fins and flippers not “tails”.

This final piece is also from the Neeleyâs Ferry mounds and is described as a âceramic effigy vessel of zoomorphic designâ.

This artifact was found in a gravesite buried three feet below ground level and has been dated from the period between 1350-1550.

As you can see it is very reminiscent of modern paleoartistâs depiction of theropod or meat eating dinosaurs. Of course, we only have the head but is it possible that the artist saw and knew about a then living version of such a creature?

Or is it more believable that this is an effigy of a mythological animal which accidently reminds us of modern ideas about how dinosaurs looked?

Bonus: Nicoya, Pre Columbian Incense Burner Maker Tops Reptilian Artifact with Feet of a Theropod Dinosaur Which is Quite A Feat for Someone Who Missed Dinosaurs by 65M Years

Top left is a pre Columbian Censer (Incensario), from the 10thâ12th century. There are many examples of this type of pre Columbian censer topped by a dragon/dinosaur. The excellent example at the top left is at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. If you take the time you can see the full body of a quadruped, dinosaur like creature with an extremely ornate crest or horns. This is typical of these artifacts.

No matter how un crocodile like the animal perched at the top is this type of vessel is known as either alligator or crocodile ware and elaborate stories have been concocted by archaeologists about the sacred nature of crocodiles and alligators in the pre Columbian cultures. Here’s a quote describing the object, top left by the Met.

On the Top right is a photo of one of those pre Columbian artifacts, Nicoya, an incense burner.
what is interesting about the artifact on the top, right is that a close up of the animals feet (bottom left) reveal and striking similarity of its feet as sculpted to that of the theropod dinsoaurs (bottom, right) and unlike those of lizards-or crocodiles.

Conclusion: There are hundreds if not thousands of artifacts in museums around the world containing representations of extinct creatures that we now called dinosaurs. The most obvious examples are labeled as fakes and are in provide collections.

Those that are not obvious dinosaurs are labeled dragons, unknown, zoomorphic, mythological, animal etc. Of course many artifacts are just those things. The issue is that when a group (archaeologists) are absolutely convinced that these animals lived millions of years ago all evidence will be viewed to reflect that belief and those that donât will be reinterpreted, labeled or hidden away.

In any case if you should find that even one of the items in our collection is a dinosaur-or that a dinosaur is the most likely explanation that one should be enough to make you question the current scientific history control. But we understand that bucking the system is difficult to do.

Since I began with a quote from the Princess Bride it might be appropriate to finish with a modified version of another such quote:

Big Science: We face each other as God intended. Sportsmanlike. No tricks, no weapons, skill against skill alone. (not actually a believer)Believer: You mean, youâll put down your rock and Iâll put down my sword, and weâll try to convince each other like civilized people-with facts and evidence?Big Science; [brandishing rock (public opinion, science mythology, ridicule] I could just wipe you out now.Believer: Frankly, I think the odds are slightly in your favor at hand fighting.Big Science: Itâs not my fault being the biggest and the strongest. I donât even exercise.

Without noting the deep irony of their announcement and without confessing their own obstinacy in having previously debunked all former evidence supporting the proposition, last year the Smithsonian Institution along with the University of Florida announced the discovery (and acceptance as genuine) of an object depicting a mammoth here in North America which they announced to be 13,000 years old.

Here is that announcement in brief:

âResearchers from the Smithsonian Institution and the University of Florida have announced the discovery of a bone fragment, approximately 13,000 years old, in Florida with an incised image of a mammoth or mastodon. This engraving is the oldest and only known example of Ice Age art to depict a proboscidean (the order of animals with trunks) in the Americas. The teamâs research is published online in the Journal of Archaeological Science.

The bone was discovered in Vero Beach, Fla., by James Kennedy, an avocational fossil hunter, who collected the bone and later, while cleaning it, discovered the engraving. Recognizing its potential importance, Kennedy contacted scientists at the University of Florida and the Smithsonianâs Museum Conservation Institute and National Museum of Natural History.

âThis is an incredibly exciting discovery,â said Dennis Stanford, anthropologist at the Smithsonianâs National Museum of Natural History and co-author of this research. âThere are hundreds of depictions of proboscideans on cave walls and carved into bones in Europe, but none from Americaâuntil now.ââŠNewsroom of the Smithsonian Scientists Reveal a First in Ice Age Art June 22, 2011

It may have been an exciting discovery but the âfactâ that there were no mammoths in North America living alongside man was a paradigm and a reality which had been set in stone by the Smithsonian itself more than 125 years ago. After the paradigm had been set, no evidence to the contrary could be accepted as genuine and like all such science created realities one literally could find one’s career at stake were one to question such a scientific decree.

The Smithsonian Museum, created in 1846 was a series of Museums and research centers created by rich benefactors for the âincrease and diffusion of knowledgeâ. The Museum is run by the U.S. Government. In its collections it has thought to hold as many as 137 million artifacts. (Some have suggested that the more controversial of those artifacts sent to that institution will never see the light of day again.)

The power of the institution to not only increase knowledge but also to establish ârealityâ is perhaps unparalleled in the world of science. The Davenport Museum was organized or created on December 14th, 1867 for more or less the same purposes but was a private, membership society originally consisting of non professionals but which later would find professional archaeologists working alongside or involved in their discoveries.

The quote in the paragraph following from Wiki Source helps to set the stage for what took place at that time; a struggle between the Smithsonian and the Davenport Museum that played out over whether or not there were ice age humans living in North America who interacted with ice age animals like mammoths. Were the Mound builders remnants of an ancient, advanced culture or were they âmerelyâ American Indians with ordinary technology and customs just like the American Indian of âtodayâ?

Somehow, the existence of mammoth art or elephant depictions in North America played into the controversy which at the time divided scientists rather evenly. This later became the Clovis/pre Clovis controversy which actually damaged or scientists on the wrong side of the issue up to this decade.

â If you are not familiar with the Davenport Academy of Natural Sciences, it rivaled, and even excelled, the Smithsonian collection at the turn of the 20th century. It was one of the many amateur Academies set up to study our world and its history.

âŠ..In the forefront were questions of the origins of the Mound Builders and whether primitive man inhabited America before, or during, the last Ice Age. Remember that this was before the discoveries of chipped stone artifacts, undeniably made by humans, in direct context with Ice Age mammals during the first quarter of the twentieth centuryâŠ.â Wikisource.org

Elephant Pipes and Inscribed Tablets

“There are in the possession of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Davenport, Iowa, two carved stone pipes, of which representations are given. * * * They seem to be unmistakable representations of an elephant, or some closely allied quadruped, and their makers must have been acquainted with the animal. The Davenport Academy also have a tablet, found in a mound near their city, containing some thirty rude pictures of animals. Most of them can be recognized, and among them there are two that seem intended for elephantsââŠ âInglorious Columbus” Mr. Edward P. Vining

In 1885, CHARLES E. PUTNAM , a former Academy president and prominent Davenport attorney, wrote a booklet on behalf of the Davenport Museum for the purpose of defending the museum and some of its discoveries from a broadside which had been directed directly at the museum and its elephant pipes and inscribed tablets; “ELEPHANT PIPES AND INSCRIBED TABLETS IN THE MUSEUM OF THE ACADEMY OF NATURAL SCIENCES DAVENPORT, IOWA.”

The attack had been made at the behest of the new head of the Smithsonian, Major Powell. The man who wrote the article which basically attacked the notion that the artifacts were genuine was not himself an archeologist- he was an ornithologist. Henry W. Henshawâs article entitled “Animal Carvings from Mounds in the Mississippi Valley, was printed in the Bureau of Ethnologyâs Second Annual Report.

Following are excerpts from Putnamâs article laying out the Smithsonianâs attack while giving a spirited defense. Other evidences of elephants in North America have been found in ancient art and potentially other discoveries that we not brought forward
but it should be noted that the academic world which may have been split up until that time officially maintained a no elephant artifacts have even been found in North America stance until just last yearâwhen the Smithsonian found-it is claimedâthe first one.

Charles Putnam of Behalf of the Davenport Museumâ

In the sharp controversy now being waged among archaeologists, as to the origin of the Mound-builders, the Bureau of Ethnology connected with the Smithsonian Institution has taken decided position as the champion of the theory that this mysterious race can be traced with comparative certainty to the ancestors of our American Indians. In the first annual report of the Bureau, Major Powell, its accomplished Director, thus emphatically states its position upon this question:

“With regard to the mounds so widely scattered between the two oceans, it may also be said that mound-building tribes were known in the early history of the discovery of this continent, and that vestiges of art discovered do not excel in any respect the arts of Indian tribes known to history.

There is, therefore, no reason for us to search for an extralimital origin, through lost tribes, for the arts discovered in the mounds of North America. The tracing of the origin of these arts to the ancestors of known tribes, or stocks of tribes, is more legitimate.” *

At a subsequent date, Major Powell, in giving his assent to the theory “that the Mound-builders were no other than the Indian tribes found in the country in post-Columbian times, and their ancestors,” makes use of this strong language:

“There has never been presented one item of evidence that the Mound-builders were a people of culture superior to that of the tribes that inhabited the valley of the Mississippi a hundred years ago. The evidence is complete that these tribes have built mounds within the historic period; and no mounds or earth-works have been discovered superior in structure or contents to those known to have been built in historic times. The theory that the country was inhabited by a people highly organized as nations, and having arts of a higher grade than those belonging to tribal society, is wild and baseless, and the fruit of that theory is nothing but exaggeration and false statement.” +

âAnother class of archaeologists as strongly maintain the opposite theory, that the Mound-builders were more advanced in civilization than the American Indian, and hence have endeavored to trace them to a Mexican origin, or to some earlier common ancestry. The leadership on this side must be accorded to Messrs. Squier and Davis, who, in their great work upon “Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley,” thus state their conclusions:

“Without undertaking to point out the affinities, or to indicate the probable origin of the builders of the western monuments, and the cause of their final disappearance, we may venture to suggest that the facts so far collected point to a connection, more or less intimate, between the race of the mounds and the semi civilized nations which formerly had their seats among the sierras of Mexico and Peru, and who erected the imposing structures which, from their number, vastness, and mysterious significance, invest the central portion of the continent with an interest no less absorbing than that which attaches to the Nile.

These nations alone, of all found in possession of the continent by the European discoverers, were essentially stationary and agricultural in their habits â conditions indispensable to large populations, to fixedness of institutions, and to any considerable advance in the ennobling artsâ

Still, it must be conceded, if the statements of the great work of Squier and Davis are unreliable, and its deductions without sufficient basis, these defects cannot be too early disclosed to the world of science. Such an exposure would be a benefaction to the cause of truth.

The attempt to reverse the thought of an age is, however, a most notable undertaking. It needs great courage, excellent scholarship, and a commanding name. It will, of course, be taken for granted that the man called to so important a work must have been long engaged in archaeological research, trained in its methods of investigation, and familiar with its literature.

We recall the names of noted archaeologists, and wonder who among them would have the temerity to engage in this gigantic undertaking. In response to our summons none such appear; but, instead, the Director of the Bureau steps promptly to the front and makes due announcement of H.W. Henshaw” as the champion of his theory; and this is the method of his introduction:

“Mr. H. W. Henshaw, skilled as a naturalist, especially as an ornithologist, and familiar by personal experience with a large part of our national territory, was led to examine into the truth of these statements, repeated from author to author without question or criticism, and used as data in all discussions on the mounds. The result is the important paper now published. His conclusions, from the evidence adduced, seem to be incontrovertible.”*

And so the valiant gentleman appointed to displace Squier and Davis is a new-comer in archaeology, but, nevertheless, is “skilled as a naturalist, especially as an ornithologist;” and, moreover, is “familiar with a large part of our national territory!” With this unique statement before us of Mr. Henshaw’s qualifications for his great work, comment would be superfluous. The recommendation is itself a condemnation. The scientific world will scarcely consent to so summary a displacement of its old worthies, at the behest of a newly-fledged archaeologist, even though he may be “skilled as a naturalist!”

From H.W. Henshaw’s “Animal Carvings from Mounds in the Mississippi Valley”:

“In considering the evidence afforded by these pipes of a knowledge of the mastodon on the part of the Mound-builder, it should be borne in mind that their authenticity as specimens of the Mound-builder’s art has been seriously called in question. Possibly the fact that the same person was instrumental in bringing to light both of the pipes has had largely to do with this suspicion, especially when it was remembered that, although explorers had been remarkably active in the same region, it has fallen to the good fortune of no one else to find anything conveying the most distant suggestion of the mastodon. * * *

The remarkable archaeological instinct which has guided the finder of these pipes has led him to some more important discoveries. By the aid of his divining-rod he has succeeded in unearthing some of the most remarkable tablets which have thus far rewarded the diligent search of the mound explorer. ******

“Archeologists must certainly deem it unfortunate that, outside of the Wisconsin mound, the only evidence of the coexistence of the Mound-builder and the mastodon should reach the scientific world through the agency of one individual. So derived, each succeeding carving of the mastodon, be it more or less accurate, instead of being accepted by archaeologists as cumulative evidence tending to establish the genuineness of the sculptured testimony showing that the Mound-builder and mastodon were coeval, will be viewed with ever-increasing suspicion. * * * *

Bearing in mind the many attempts at archaeological fraud that recent years have brought to light, archaeologists have a right to demand that objects which afford a basis for such important deductions as the coeval life of the Mound builder and mastodon should be above the slightest suspicion, not only in respect to their resemblances, but as regards Â»he circumstances of their discovery. If they are not above suspicion, the science of archaeology can better afford to wait for further and more certain evidence than to commit itself to theories which may prove stumbling-blocks to truth, until that indefinite time when further investigation shall show their illusory nature.” *

Mr. Putnamâs Reply:

âWe find here an abundance of hints, innuendoes, imaginings, suspicions, without the statement of a fact to justify them. Had it been more specific, this paper would have had more force. In a grave scientific essay, controverting the authenticity of some very important discoveries, it should have been stated when, where, how, by whom, and for what reasons the genuineness of these relics had been “seriously called in question.” To controvert a statement with a sneer is the peculiar achievement of the ordinary polemic, and cannot be set down among accepted scientific methods.â

In entering upon his work of demolition, it was open to Mr. Henshaw to make some show of thorough investigation and fair treatment. The circumstances called for it. He occupied a conspicuous position and wielded large influence. If his criticism was well founded, it would serve a useful purpose in driving charlatans from the fold of truth. If based only on partial investigations, and without substantial foundation, his censure would tend to destroy confidence in all historical evidence, discourage original research, and poison truth at its very fountain-head.

When, therefore, Mr. Henshaw was forced by the exigencies of his theory to assail these discoveries, archaeologists had a right to expect that he would make thorough examination into the evidence of their genuineness; that he would visit the scenes of these explorations and take careful note of the surroundings; that he would make searching inquiry as to the character and reliability of the discoverers; that he would closely question the members of the Davenport Academy as to the existence of any suspicious circumstances; that he would make critical inspection of the relics themselves to note peculiarities which might escape an eye less thoroughly trained than his own; and that, in this just and judicious manner, he would seek to satisfy all reasonable scruples of the earnest and conscientious seeker after truth.

All this was easy for Mr. Henshaw, for he had at his command unlimited resources. It will be learned with surprise that he did none of these things. This feeling will be increased to astonishment when it is ascertained that, instead of adopting these wise precautions, Mr. Henshaw seized with avidity upon a stray paper, written by a gentleman in no way connected with the Davenport Academy, imperfectly illustrated with some coarse wood-cuts, and published in an Eastern magazine, and that he made this second-hand information the poor excuse for his unscientific screed.

When, in addition to all this, it is found that Mr. Henshaw never consulted the extensive correspondence concerning these relics in the possession of the Smithsonian Institution, and apparently never gave even a passing glance to the photographs of these elephant pipes in its museum, archeologists will regard with just resentment these scientific delinquencies of this eminent gentleman.

In the argument of Mr. Henshaw, based upon the absence of the “tail” in these carvings, he is peculiarly unfortunate. He has been misled, no doubt, by the faulty “illustrations,” which alone he must have consulted, inasmuch as in each of these pipes the “tail” is well developed.

It will also be found clearly represented in the photographs sent to the Smithsonian Institution, in the illustrations of the pipes given in the Proceedings of the Davenport Academy, and in the stamp on the cover of the volume. So, too, in the “Prehistoric America” of Nadaillac, quite recently introduced to the American public by a noted archaeologist (Mr. Dall), we find an illustration of one of these identical elephant pipes, with the missing “tail” in full view!

It is a noticeable circumstance, that, while Barber, Vining, and other writers commented upon the absence of “tusks,” it remained for Mr. Henshaw to make the remarkable discovery that the “tail” was also missing in these carvings.

The conclusion is inevitable, that Mr. Henshaw drew largely upon Mr. Barber’s article for his scientific material, and that he was betrayed into the commission of this mistake by the “imperfection” of the illustrations used by Mr. Barber and copied by Mr. Henshaw without verification.

The following are correct illustrations of the two elephant pipes now in our museum. Figure i (top) represents the pipe plowed up by Peter Mare in a corn-field in Louisa County, Iowa, and Figure II (bottom) that discovered by Rev. A. Blumer in a mound in the same county :*

With these illustrations in view, archaeologists will read with amusement the singular argument of

Mr. Henshaw, based upon the supposed absence of the “tails” in these pipes:

“It is also remarkable that in neither of these pipes is the tail indicated, although a glance at the other sculptures will show that in the full-length figures this member is invariably shown. In respect to these omissions, the pipes from Iowa are strikingly suggestive of the elephant mound of Wisconsin, with the peculiarities of which the sculptor, whether ancient or modern, might almost be supposed to have been acquainted. It certainly must be looked upon as a curious coincidence that carvings found at a point so remote from the elephant mound, and presumably the work of other hands, should so closely copy the imperfections of that mound.” *

Conclusion

This little academic battle caught our attention because it shows the power of institutional science to decide what ârealityâ is. Whatever the merits of the arguments on either side, the Smithsonian simply took a position and whether that position was correct or incorrect it was made on the whim of the director-not because the issue had actually been decided âscientificallyâ.

Since the time of this controversy played out in these two articles, most academics have towed the line and the Davenport artifacts are routinely identified in encyclopedias, etc. as hoaxes if they are mentioned at all. Text books and academics state the âfactsâ unequivocally-that as the Director said any suggestion that Mound builder were “advanced” or that they lived along with mammoths was “wild and baseless” exaggeration and false statement”. Up until today it is as though the issue had never been controversial.

And thus several generations of archaeologists, other scientists and students have simply âknownâ that no evidence that man, mound builder or otherwise had interacted with mammoths in North America.

That is until last June when the Smithsonian changed the game again and there was a momentary wobble in the fabric of “scientific reality” which in many cases bares only an occasional intersect with reality.

Warning: Darwinism is a paradigm, the age of the universe is a paradigm, global warming is a paradigm ( in the 1970′s it was worldwide global cooling and a coming ice age that spelled our doom), the big bang is a paradigm where invisible dark matter and energy have been recruited to explain up to 96% of observations, the origin of life from inanimate matter is a paradigm. Columbus discovering America is a paradigm as well but the objectivity of science and of scientists is just a straight up falsehood.

“From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over all the land. About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, âEli, Eli, lema sabachthani?â (which means âMy God, my God, why have you forsaken me?â). When some of those standing there heard this, they said, âHeâs calling Elijah.â Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink. The rest said, âNow leave him alone. Letâs see if Elijah comes to save him.â And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesusâ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people. When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, âSurely he was the Son of God!â”….Matthew 27

Crucifixion Ain’t No Fiction: Three Hour Darkness Over the Entire World Confirmed by Historical Sources v2

by Chris Parker

The story of the longest day wherein the Lord caused the sun to stand still is recorded in Joshua 10:13 and reiterated in Habakkuk 3:11 and is discussed in my article “The Day the Sun Stood Still–Joshua’s Long Day”. Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky, in his 1950 book “WORLDS IN COLLISION, uncovered multiple worldwide sources that indicated that the event was historical; that it actually happened and was recorded in the history of peoples around the world. The fact that Velikovsky attributes the actual occurrence to a natural event rather than to a supernatural one is unimportant. The fact is that the record of the bible of this extraordinary event has been confirmed as true even by secular unbelievers.

What about the darkness that the bible tell us occurred at the crucifixion of Jesus Christ? All the accounts of the crucifixion in the gospels confirm that the unnatural darkness came upon the scene and spanned the hours between 12 noon and 3 o’clock P.M. Certain of the accounts describe the darkness as covering the “whole land”. However the Greek there could also have been interpreted as the “whole world”.

To get a bit technical, the Greek word is number G1093 and could be translated in the following ways:
1) arable land
2) the ground, the earth as a standing place
3) the main land as opposed to the sea or water4) the earth as a whole
a) the earth as opposed to the heavens vb) the inhabited earth, the abode of men and animals5) a country, land enclosed within fixed boundaries, a tract of land, territory, region

Whether there was darkness at noon in the middle of the day in just the “lands” around Jerusalem or over the entire world that unnatural darkness must have struck terror and wonder into the hearts of those who were engaged in the crucifixion of the Christ! Scholars both at the time and today like Velikovsky did with respect to Joshua’s longest day have tried to attribute the darkness to a natural event-namely to an eclipse. However, the Passover takes place at the wrong time of the month for a solar eclipse as we’ll discuss a bit later and at most an eclipse would last 8 or 9 minutes and not three hours. The fact that the three hours is a given as an actual event that needs to be explained by secular sources is an important confirmation of the historicity of the event.

If the darkness was indeed worldwide people experiencing it in other locations would have no clue as to why the darkness was occurring and peoples who were already in the darkness of their local time would not have noticed. The Jews and the Romans had reason to connect the dots however. These events (unnatural daytime darkness and earthquakes) even caused the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus to be frightened and to exclaim that “Surely he was the Son of God”.

The Jews on the other hand had even more reason to be afraid and to be concerned about the darkness. For almost 800 years the following prophecy of Amos had been read in the temple and in their synagogues”

“In that day,â declares the Sovereign Lord, âI will make the sun go down at noon and darken the earth in broad daylight.
I will turn your religious festivals into mourning and all your singing into weeping. I will make all of you wear sackcloth and shave your heads. I will make that time like mourning for an only son and the end of it like a bitter day. ….Amos Chapter 8 Around 750 BC

The naming of the exact time of the darkness and the reference to mourning for an “only son”, make it clear that the prophecy has to refer to the crucifixion of God’s son and the attendant darkness which the prophecy acknowledges will be over the whole world. The death of Christ was where the old law and its attendant religious festivals, ordinances and Holy days were “nailed to the cross”. In 70 A.D. the Jewish temple was destroyed which put an end to the sacrifices and the ability of the Jews to continue worshiping under the Mosaic Law.

We have the biblical account of the crucifixion which mentions darkness for three hours and earthquakes and other occurrences. We have the biblical prophecy of Amos which predicted those events 750-800 years before they occurred in great detail. What about historical, non biblical sources?

Around A.D. 50, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world spanning the time of the Trojan War (1200-1300 B.C.) to his own time. The history itself apparently no longer exists but certain quotations from the work appear in the writings of others. Julius Africanus a historian writing about A.D. 220 was one such scholar who apparently had access to Thallus’ history. Thallus had a reference not to the crucifixion in his historical account but to the daytime darkness that occurred at that time. Africanus is quoted quoting the prior work and refuting the notion that the cause of the darkness could have been an eclipse:

“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the Passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Savior falls on the day before the Passover; but an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun.

And it cannot happen at any other time but in the interval between the first day of the new moon and the last of the old, that is, at their junction: how then should an eclipse be supposed to happen when the moon is almost diametrically opposite the sun? Let opinion pass however; let it carry the majority with it; and let this portent of the world be deemed an eclipse of the sun, like others a portent only to the eye.

Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth–manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? Surely no such event as this is recorded for a long period. (XVIII.1

“Tertullian, in his Apologeticus, tells the story of the darkness that had commenced at noon during the crucifixion; those who were unaware of the prediction, he says, “no doubt thought it an eclipse”. He suggests that the evidence is still available: “You yourselves have the account of the world-portent still in your archives.”

The early historian and theologian, Rufinus of Aquileia (between 340 and 345 â 410), in his expanded work of Eusebiusâ Ecclesiastical History, includes a part of the defense given to Maximinus by Lucian of Antioch, shortly before he suffered martyrdom in 312. Lucian, like Tertullian, was also convinced that an account of the darkness that accompanied the crucifixion could be found among Roman records. Ussher recorded Lucian’s corresponding statement given to Maximinus as, âSearch your writings and you shall find that, in Pilateâs time, when Christ suffered, the sun was suddenly withdrawn and a darkness followed.â

The next prominent Christian historian after Eusebius, Paulus Orosius (375 â 418), wrote c. 417 that Jesus “voluntarily gave himself over to the Passion but through the impiety of the Jews, was apprehended and nailed to the cross, as a very great earthquake took place throughout the world, rocks upon mountains were split, and a great many parts of the largest cities fell by this extraordinary violence. On the same day also, at the sixth hour of the day, the Sun was entirely obscured and a loathsome night suddenly overshadowed the land, as it was said, âan impious age feared eternal night.â Moreover, it was quite clear that neither the Moon nor the clouds stood in the way of the light of the Sun, so that it is reported that on that day the Moon, being fourteen days old, with the entire region of the heavens thrown in between, was farthest from the sight of the Sun, and the stars throughout the entire sky shone, then in the hours of the day or rather in that terrible night. To this, not only the authority of the Holy Gospels attest, but even some books of the Greeks.”"….Wikipedia

Many ancient historians writing shortly after the time of Christ freely acknowledged his existence but professed varying ideas about who he really was. For instance one ancient historian acknowledged his existence and even that he performed many miracles. He attributed these miracles to magic powers that he supposedly acquired while visiting Egypt.

Born around 54 A.D. Cornelius Tacitus was another noted Roman historian who noted The Crucifixion of Jesus. He stated that Jesus had been crucified by Pontius Pilate, and that Rome was in darkness during the reign of Tiberius the Caesar in AD.33.”

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth….King James Bible

In George Orwell’s fictional novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four”, the Ministry of Truth is the unintentionally ironic name of the propaganda ministry. In real life Planned Parenthood which sounds like a loverly orgainzation dedicated to parents and to children actually focuses quite a bit of its money and energy on abortions. Margaret Sanger an advocate of eugenics initally called her origanization “The American Birth Control League. “Eugenics is the applied science of the bio-social movement which advocates practices to improve the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population. It is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and reduced reproduction of less desired people and traits.”..Wikipedia

So Peta, right? People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, right. We all believe that animals should be treated well but Peta has taken this idea far, far away from any sensible notion of what that should mean. So, you can probably guess what’s coming.

Arguably, the most people know about PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is that its members occasionally parade in the nude (or near nude), on the theme “we’d rather go naked than wear furs.”

It is especially newsworthy when the likes of Pamela Anderson and Kim Basinger participate. PETA justifies nudity on the basis of “advertising through the media;” nude activists for animals “consistently grab headlines.”

Founded in 1980, PETA has done stellar work in curbing cruel and often useless torturous experimentation on animals of all sorts — as reflected in a summary of its mission statement: “Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment.”

As such it opposes circuses, zoos, farms, pet stores and the like.

PETA advertises itself as the largest animal rights organization in the world, with over three million members and supporters. PETA stages “rescue” operations of abused animals, and can serve a useful purpose, which it is exceedingly adept at publicizing.

What PETA does not publicize, however, it euthanizes — kills — some 85% of the animals it rescues.

As far back as 2008, the Center for Consumer Freedom petitioned Virginia’s Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (VDACS) to have PETA officially reclassified as a “slaughterhouse.” It claimed PETA’s own official reports, which indicated that it put to death virtually ever dog and cat it took in for adoption. This policy extended from 2006 through 2011.

Virginia requires animal shelters to report the number of dogs and cats taken in each year — how many are euthanized and how many are adopted.

These statistics are available through Virginia’s Sunshine Law and, as incredible as some may find it, since 1998, of the 31,815 animals (mostly dogs and cats) admitted to PETA shelters, only 3,159 were adopted — and 27,751 were killed.

That’s a 9.7% adoption rate and an 87.2% kill rate — a ghastly record for an organization purporting to work on behalf of animals. To me that suggests a view that if an animal isn’t free and in the wild, it is better off dead.

But wait, it gets worse. Since 2006, the PETA adoption rate has dropped precipitously, and the kill rate risen dramatically. In 2006, of 3,061 animals admitted to PETA’s shelter, 12 (0.39%) were adopted, 2,981 (97.49%) were euthanized.

Last year – 2011 — some 1,992 animals were admitted, 24 were adopted (1.2%) and 1,911 (95.9%) were killed. And this is just Virginia.

PETA’s practice of euthanasia has resulted in an alliance with the Humane Society of the U.S. A zero birthrate is the goal for dogs and cats, not a zero kill rate.

Yet according to Newsweek, Humane Society shelters in Nevada, New York, San Francisco, and Texas have adopted a “no-kill” policy that saves money, gets dogs and cats adopted. The save ratio is 85%.

That strikes me as more humane than PETA — and is curiously mindful of what the Toronto Humane Society was aiming at before the provincial OSPCA took it over, with its kill rate secret, but around 50%. They must love PETA.

Today, Toronto Animal Services (TAS) seems to discourage adoption in favor of euthanasia, and prospective customers for adopting a dog or cat are often told none are available.

The Katabatic winds howl around Antarcticaâs gale thrashed coast. But once its green valleyâs were filled with thriving Glossopteris Pine and Beach forests. How do we know this? âScott of the Antarcticâ was the first to discover telltale fossils on the Beardmore Glacier in 1912. Since then petrified tree stumps and leaves; bones of dinosaurs and marsupials; and fossil rich coal has been discovered in the now hostile environment.

According to classic geology, this previous lush environment thrived millions of years ago in the Permian age. The shifting Antarctic continent, inexorably plodding at millimetres per year, gradually moved into icy hibernation. The flora and fauna were iced over and slowly fossilized, just as in Greenland!

But wait! This formation of a three kilometre thick ice sheet is no meagre feat. Antarctica contains ninety percent of the worldâs ice, yet some of Antarcticaâs valleys are the driest places on earth. Antarctica is technically considered a desert. Incredibly little snow falls in the interior (five centimetres per year rain equivalent) where the ice sheet is considerably thicker. Katabatic snow storms occur only on the coast where there is thinner ice. Is this a contradiction? Nevertheless, classic Geologists argue that, eons of time can explain away these ice sheet anomalies.

Curiously, ice core studies contradict the millions of years of ice cover necessary to fit the continental drift paradigm. For instance, the Vostok ice core station asserts that the continentâs average three kilometre deep ice sheet is only around 250,000 years old. How can this be? The ice sheet should indicate millions of densely layered ice rings if the slow continental drift theory from tropics to cold is correct. Surely the ice sheet would be significantly thicker where a slowly drifting continent first entered the Antarctic pole?

Even this low geological age is now being questioned. Is it possible the Antarctic ice sheet is only a few thousand years old?

“For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. For in this hope we were saved”. Romans 8

According to evolutionists, anatomically modern humans, Homo sapiens, sapiens evolved approximately 200,000 years ago. The view of most Christians and certainly of “young earth creationists” is that man along with the entire universe was created less than 10,000 years ago. Although mutation and natural selection is the supposed engine powering evolution mutations are in fact harmful nearly 100% of the time. Creationists believe that man was created “perfect” but that since the fall of man in the garden the whole creation including man has been becoming less perfect as time goes by. The impact of harmful mutations has caused man’s genome to actually degenerate over time. Could the current rate of de-evolution have been occurring over the last 200,000 years?

Now comes a peer reviewed article in nature- a “high resolution sequencing study” of the human genome which indicates that the vast majority of the mutational load carried by human beings occurred within the last 5,000 to 10,000 years. Naturally the authors of this study have a different interpretation of the results than do creationists….s8intcom

The human genome has been busy over the past 5,000 years. Human populations have grown exponentially, and new genetic mutations arise with each generation. Humans now have a vast abundance of rare genetic variants in the protein-encoding sections of the genome1, 2.

A study published today in Nature3 now helps to clarify when many of those rare variants arose. Researchers used deep sequencing to locate and date more than one million single-nucleotide variants â locations where a single letter of the DNA sequence is different from other individuals â in the genomes of 6,500 African and European Americans. The findings confirm their earlier work suggesting that the majority of variants, including potentially harmful ones, were picked up during the past 5,000â10,000 years. Researchers also saw the genetic stamp of the diverging migratory history of the two groups.

The large sample size â 4,298 North Americans of European descent and 2,217 African Americans â has enabled the researchers to mine down into the human genome, says study co-author Josh Akey, a genomics expert at the University of Washington in Seattle. He adds that the researchers now have âa way to look at recent human history in a way that we couldnât before.â

Akey and his colleagues were able to dig out genetic variants occurring in less than 0.1% of the sample population â a resolution that is a full order of magnitude finer than that achieved in previous studies, says Alon Keinan, a statistical geneticist at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, who was not involved with the study.

Of 1.15 million single-nucleotide variants found among more than 15,000 protein-encoding genes, 73% in arose the past 5,000 years, the researchers report.

On average, 164,688 of the variants â roughly 14% â were potentially harmful, and of those, 86% arose in the past 5,000 years. âThereâs so many of [variants] that exist that some of them have to contribute to disease,â says Akey

Genetic bottleneck

The researchers found that the European Americans had a larger proportion of potentially harmful variants â probably an artefact of their original migration out of Africa. The first small group of humans that left Africa for Europe experienced a sudden drop in genetic diversity â a âbottleneckâ â owing to the smaller pool of possible mating partners. In the rapid expansion in population size that followed, selection was slow to catch up to and weed out potentially harmful mutations.

More broadly, the results suggest that humans are carrying around larger numbers of deleterious mutations than they did a few thousand years ago. But this doesnât mean that humans now are more susceptible to disease, says Akey. Rather, it suggests that most diseases arecaused by more than one variant, and that diseases could operate through different genetic pathways and mechanisms in different people.

The findings further undermine the idea that common diseases are caused by common variations, says Sarah Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. When genomics researchers first began looking at the genome for links to diseases, that was their assumption, but they quickly saw it fall short (see Nature 456, 18â21; 2008).

âThis type of study nails home the point that we need to be looking at rare variation,â Tishkoff says.

As it becomes cheaper and easier to sequence individualsâ genomes, researchers are likely to see finer genetic patterns and trends in the coming years. They could even see patterns of ancestry within just a few generations, says Akey.